Transnational challenges to Indonesia's security<\/p>\n
Andi Widjajanto
\nInternational Fellow
\nNational Defense University
\nWashington, D.C.<\/p>\n
The global campaign against terrorism symbolizes a much larger
\ntrend: The emerging tendency of nation-states to turn their focus
\nto transnational security threats. This new tendency has
\nimportant implications for international relations theory as well
\nas for the conduct of foreign and defense policy. One immediate
\nimplication is the common perception that an alternative
\nframework for thinking about security that encompasses the
\ntransnational agenda is required.<\/p>\n
Another implication is that a transformation of the
\npolicymaking process is needed to deal with this complex issue.<\/p>\n
International relations as an academic discipline has been
\ndominated by \"realism\". Realists see world politics as a \"state
\nof war\" and they believe that the international system is best
\ncharacterized as an anarchic one.<\/p>\n
The methods of securing or restoring the balance such as the
\nformation of alliances, sphere influence, intervention,
\ndiplomatic bargaining, (dis)armament, buffer zone, and war are
\nrecognized as the prominent strategies to create peace.<\/p>\n
The realist's characterization of world politics is too
\nnarrowly conceived to make sense of the transnational challenge
\nto global security. A new class of transnational threats is
\nemerging.<\/p>\n
In the post-realist world, one dependent variable, for
\nexample, the uncontrolled proliferation of weapons of mass
\ndestruction, global terrorism, widespread regional instability
\ncaused by the collapse of many nation-states, or Huntington's
\nprophecy of a global clash of civilization, will not sufficiently
\nshape the nature of global politics.<\/p>\n
The threats and crises in the years ahead seem much more
\nlikely to be diverse in source, nature, and scale. These threats
\nstem from demographic pressures, resource depletion, global
\nwarming, unregulated population movements, transnational crime
\nand virulent new strains of infectious diseases, and many others
\nnot previously associated with international security.<\/p>\n
Today, a complex multi-centric world has emerged. This world
\nconsists of various non-state actors such as multinational
\ncorporations, ethnic minorities, sub national governments,
\nprofessional societies, social movements, non-governmental
\norganizations, political parties, and individual actors.<\/p>\n
If Indonesia is to actively address the complex character of
\ntransnational security threats, its traditional style of
\npolicymaking has to change.<\/p>\n
The policymaking process is a series of concentric circles. At
\nthe center is the president, surrounded by political advisors.
\nThis inner circle usually includes the Minister of Foreign
\nAffairs, the Minister of Defense, the Minister of Home Affairs,
\nthe Director of National Intelligence Agency, and the Chiefs of
\nthe National Police and the military.<\/p>\n
Beyond this circle lies the relevant departments of the
\nexecutive branch and various independent agencies and
\ncommissions. Farther still from the center is the congressional
\nring with the organizations of the legislative branch. The outer
\ncircle consists the public arena: The media, interest groups, and
\nthe general public.<\/p>\n
Indonesia's security and foreign policymaking is best
\ncharacterized as highly centralized bureaucracies in which
\nsecurity policy decisions are made mainly at the inner circle.
\nThis becomes a dominant feature because traditionally security is
\nregarded as a high politics agenda that has immediate impact on
\nnational survival.<\/p>\n
This policy-making feature will make it difficult for any
\nagency to handle transnational threats that might appear in
\nseveral different forms in different regions at the same time.<\/p>\n
Many of the challenges confronting transnational security
\nthreats could be reduced if the government were to reorient its
\nthinking and operations and decentralize its decision making
\nprocess. This reorientation can be conducted by using three
\nmethods.<\/p>\n
Firstly, the government should continue to define security as
\na multidimensional concept that requires a firm interagency
\ncooperation. A case in point is the debate about the possible
\nengagement of the Indonesian Military (TNI) to address
\ntransnational threats.<\/p>\n
Proponents for military deployment argue that transnational
\nsecurity threats are the major security challenges to the nation-
\nstate in the next decades. On the other hand, military
\ninvolvement would detract the military from its fundamental role
\nof defending the nation from external attacks and would create a
\nfinancial drain to military budgets.<\/p>\n
The point of agreement of this debate could be a call for the
\ngovernment to designate a particular division of its military
\nforces to deal specifically with transnational security threats,
\nor Indonesia could create units within civilian agencies that
\nmight even have military training to acquire specific skill to
\ndeal with transnational threats.<\/p>\n
The second method is decentralization. Although the inner
\ncircle will continue to design the national security strategy,
\nthe responsibility for their conduct could be decentralized. The
\ninner circle could concentrate their attention on major potential
\ncrises that pose direct and immediate threats to global and
\nnational security.<\/p>\n
Direct attacks on Indonesian territory, interstate aggression,
\na regional arms race, and humanitarian crises are examples of
\nissues that would be the areas for inner circle concern. Lower
\nbureaucratic levels then could both undertake early warning tasks
\nand oversee preventive responses in local arenas.<\/p>\n
The third method is that Indonesia's security strategy should
\nrecognize the importance of adopting a more multilateral
\napproach. Indonesia must try to provide a counter-balance of
\npreemptive doctrine of U.S. President George W. Bush. This
\ncounter-balance is the introduction of the global preventive
\nregime, which would comprise the United Nations system, regional
\norganizations, and non governmental organizations.<\/p>\n
Before taking this step, Indonesia should first seek to gain
\nsupport for the initiative from other major power, who should
\nexercise their leadership by providing resources to multilateral
\norganizations and NGOs on the front lines of prevention,
\nproviding diplomatic support behind particular preventive
\nefforts, and providing experienced individual representative to
\nmediate incipient disputes under multilateral auspices.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/transnational-challenges-to-indonesias-security-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}